BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAS NAGAR, MOHALI
Consumer Complaint No.673 of 2014
Date of institution: 25.11.2014
Date of Decision: 28.04.2015
1. Gajinder Singh son of A.S. Chahal
2. Smt. Baljinder Kaur w/o Gajinder Singh
Both residents of House No.2075, Phase-7, Mohali.
……..Complainants
Versus
1. M/s. Singla Builders and Promoters Ltd. Chandigarh-Kharar Road, Village Desu Majra, District SAS Nagar (Mohali) through its Managing Director Aman Singla.
2nd Address:
SBP Homes, SCO No.146-148, Sector 43-B, Chandigarh
2. Aman Singla, Managing Director, M/s. Singla Builders and Promoters Ltd., SBP Homes, SCO No.146-148, Sector 43-B, Chandigarh
………. Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
CORAM
Mrs. Madhu. P. Singh, President.
Shri A.B. Aggarwal, Member.
Present: Shri Anil Malhotra, counsel for the complainants.
Opposite Parties ex-parte
(Mrs. Madhu P. Singh, President)
ORDER
The complainants have filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for issuance of following directions to the OPs to:
(a) pay them Rs.6,48,870/- towards interest @ 18% per annum due to delay in providing the possession w.e.f. 01.07.2013 to 23.11.2014 and to further pay interest @ 18% per annum from the date of filing the complaint till actual physical possession.
(b) to pay them Rs.6.00 lacs as damages i.e. Rs.5.00 lacs for not providing a world class club house and Rs.1.00 lac for non provision of the amenities.
(c) to provide the covered stilt parking.
(d) to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony and harassment.
(e) to pay Rs.33,000/- as litigation expenses.
The complainants have pleaded in the complaint that OP No.1 is a builder and developer and OP No.2 is its Managing Director. On the allurement of OP No.1 as depicted in the brochure Ex.C-1, the complainants purchased Flat No.609, 6th Floor in the project of the OPs namely SBP North Valley at Sector 127, Mohali vide agreement to sell dated 13.08.2011 Ex.C-2. Allotment letter dated 13.08.2011 Ex.C-3 was also issued by the OPs. On the promise of providing world class club house by the OPs, the complainants paid Rs.5.00 lacs extra price than the prevalent market price of the similar flats. As per Clause-10 of the agreement to sell the OPs were to provide time bound possession of the flat on or before 30.06.2013 subject to regular payment of the installments. The installments were paid by the complainant regularly and even sometimes before due dates. The other charges were also paid by the complainants as and when demanded. The last installment was paid by the complainants on 20.06.2013. Inspite of timely payment, the OPs failed to provide the possession of the flat. The OP fraudulently got the signatures of the complainants on the possession letter on 27.05.2014 but did not provide the actual physical possession till date. The complainants vide letters dated 07.06.2014, 09.07.2014 and 22.07.2014 Ex.C-4 to C-6 requested the OPs to complete the work but neither they completed the work nor replied to the letters. The OPs are liable to pay interest @ 18% per annum on the amount of Rs.25,80,000/- from 01.07.2013 till actual date of possession. The OPs also failed to provide world class club house having facilities such as swimming pool, sauna steam bath etc. etc. The complainants also got issued legal notice dated 11.08.2014 Ex.C-7 to the OPs for handing over the possession and payment of interest on the deposited amount. Non provision of the promised amenities and possession is an act of deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.
2. Notices sent to the OPs through post and as per the report of India post, the notices were delivered to the OPs. However, none appeared for them and they were thus proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 07.01.2015.
3. Evidence of the complainants consists of affidavit of Gajinder Singh Ex.CW-1/1; copies of documents Ex.C-1 to C-9.
4. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Uttrakhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in case titled as Consoritum Securities Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Smt. Anjana Tyagi, 2013(3) CLT 570 by relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission in case titled as Mathura Mahto Mistry Vs. Bindeshwar Jha (Dr.) & another, 2008 (I) CLT 566, the OPs was given three opportunities to rebut the evidence of the complainant. However, none appeared for them to rebut the evidence.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the written arguments.
6. The complainants have purchased the flat by paying total consideration of the flat by 27.05.2014. As per the agreement Clause-10 the possession of the flat was to be handed over to the complainants on or before 30.06.2013. The possession of the flat has not been handed over to the complainants till 07.06.2014 as is evident from Ex.C-4 a letter from the complainants duly received by the OPs under signatures and stamp. The perusal of the letter shows that the complainants could not take the possession as the keys of the flat were not handed over to them and the cupboards and toilet fittings were incomplete. The complainants vide Ex.C-5 again brought some defects and deficiencies in the flat i.e. chimney in kitchen, granite slab in kitchen, painting work, repair of wooden flooring etc. being incomplete, though the possession letter has been given to the complainants on 27.05.2014 but the keys were not handed over to them. Still as a follow up the complainants vide Ex.C-6 dated 22.07.2014 reiterated the deficiencies already mentioned in Ex.C-5 and other defects like gym not ready and wire gauge door of master bed twisted etc. to be removed and also made a request for handing over the keys of the flat in question and payment of dues as per agreement for delayed possession. Despite having sent the legal notice by registered post Ex.C-7 the OPs have not responded back and redressed the grievances of the complainants.
7. Admittedly the complainants signed the possession letter on 27.05.2014 but offer possession of the flat without keys is a defective possession. By retaining the keys and not removing the defects pointed out by the complainants vide Ex.C-5 to C-7, the OPs have indulged into unfair trade practice and rendered deficient after sale service.
8. So far compensation for delay in possession is concerned, the relevant clause 10 of the Buyers Agreement Ex.C-2 puts an obligation on the part of the OPs to pay to the allottee compensation @ Rs.3/- per sq. ft. per month of the super area till the date of offer of possession, in case the OPs failed to deliver the possession of the flat to the allottee on or before 30.06.2013. Admittedly, the complainants have signed the possession letter on 27.05.2014 without the delivery of physical possession of the flat as well as its keys. Thus, it amply evident that from 30.06.2013 to till date the physical possession of the property has not been handed over to the complainants. Thus, due to delay in handing over the physical possession beyond the fixed date of 30.06.2013, the complainants are entitled to Rs.3/- per sq. ft. per month of the super area of the flat till the date of proper and effective offer of possession of defect free flat. The perusal of buyers agreement Ex.C-2 shows that the complainants have paid the total consideration for flat No.609, 6th Floor having an approximate super area of 1290 sq. ft. Therefore, due to delay in handing over the possession, the complainants are entitled to Rs.3/- per sq. ft. per month for 1290 sq. ft. for a period from 01.07.2013 till the date of handing over of defect free possession of the property to the complainants by the OPs.
9. So far as lack of basic amenities like gym not ready etc. is concerned, the complainants have not adduced any evidence in this regard. Therefore, due to lack of evidence no relief can be granted to the complainants on this account.
10. Thus the offer of defective and incomplete possession by the OPs on 27.05.2014 and withholding of the keys of the flat and further not removing the defects so pointed out by the complainants in the flat in question and further nonpayment of the agreed dues as per Clause-10 of the agreement for delay in possession beyond agreed date of 30.06.2013, is an act of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs for which the complaint deserves to be allowed and the complainants deserve compensation.
11. For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is allowed with the following directions to the OPs to:
(a) pay to the complainants compensation of Rs.3/- per sq. ft. per month for 1290 sq. ft. from 01.07.2013 till the date of handing over the actual physical possession of the defect free flat in question alongwith the keys.
(b) pay to the complainants a lump sum compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only) on account of mental agony, harassment and costs of litigation.
Compliance of this order be made within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Certified copies of the order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced.
April 28, 2015.
(Mrs. Madhu P. Singh)
President
(A.B. Aggarwal)
Member
